Existing access control mechanisms for human communication channels do not adequately reflect the dynamic nature of personal relationships, that is, (1) that people's management of their accessibility with respect to specific people evolves over time, (2) that people's management of their accessibility with respect to specific channels evolves over time, and (3) that accessibility is an asymmetric, interpersonal relationship that is socially negotiated on an ongoing basis.
Humans have a limited ability to process information through their senses. As a result, people typically limit the number of information channels that are simultaneously active around them. Human attention can be thought of as a limited resource that must be managed as more and more immediate inter-personal communication mechanisms arise.
In commonly-used communication systems, access control is “by obscurity”—once the address of a device (such as a phone number) is known, access is allowed for the indefinite future to all who know of, or who can be given, the address. From the perspective of the address' owner, it would be desirable to be able to revoke access, but existing revocation methods have drawbacks: canceling an address puts administrative burdens on the address' owner, and explicit revocation (as in password expiration) is heavyweight and often has negative social consequences.
Further, the desire for contact is often asymmetric and it can be socially awkward to refuse to provide contact information to another. For example, a person can be perceived as rude if they refuse to give someone their phone number.
Access control mechanisms in computer-mediated communication technologies do not adjust well to meet these challenges. More specifically, in many current technologies, access control mechanisms rely on access to a static piece of contact information, such as a phone number. Once someone has another person's phone number, email address, etc., they are able to contact that person until the phone number, email address, etc. is changed. Thus, this type of static access does not meet people's changing needs.
A few access control mechanisms exist that address a subset of these issues. For example, some existing mechanisms do provide support for timeouts. As a specific example, temporary phone numbers may be supplied as part of dating services. Such phone numbers are active for a specific duration of time; they cease to be active once that time period has passed and can not be renewed.
It would be advantageous to provide a mechanism for access control that enables negotiated evolution and revocation of a communication privilege in a socially-acceptable manner.